Brown (who by the way is seeking to disrupt the pride celebration in Charlotte, N.C. next weekend) has written a piece on gays and children. The title of the piece “Please stop sexualizing our children” should give you an indication of where he is headed.
It’s one of those Anita Bryant-like pieces which implies rather slyly that gays are trying to “convert” children. And as with all religious right hit pieces regarding the gay community, he pulls out “examples” of just how the gay community is “sexualizing” children:
But there’s more. There is the sexualizing of our children in the public schools, and I’m not talking about sex-ed classes. I’m talking about teaching gay history to elementary school children, as now mandated by law in California with the recent passing of SB 48, thereby introducing sexual categories to little ones who haven’t the slightest clue what sexual orientation is, let alone have the ability to wrap their minds around “bisexual” or “transgender.”
Please notice what how Brown tries to imply that this bill is about “sexualizing” children. Of course this is a lie. According to the author of the bill, CA State Sen Mark Leno:
Children need to feel self-confident and safe, both emotionally and physically, in order to learn and thrive in school. They are denied a safe school environment when they are exposed to negative stereotypes in classroom materials and school-sponsored activities. California law currently addresses this problem for many children by prohibiting instruction which reflects adversely on people of certain personal characteristics such as race, sex, color, creed, disability, national origin or ancestry. California law also requires that public instruction include the historical contributions of underrepresented cultural and ethnic groups such as African American, Native Americans, Asian American, Mexican Americans and other groups.
Despite these protections, some children’s needs are still not met by the law. Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender students are an example of one group that is still vulnerable to discrimination in instructional materials and school activities. SB 48 would remedy this problem by adding coverage for sexual orientation and gender, consistent with other laws prohibiting discrimination such as the Fair Employment and Housing Act and the Unruh Civil Rights Act.
The FAIR Education Act also require that lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) Americans are included and recognized for their important historical contributions to the economic, political and social development of California and the United States. Specifically, this legislation would add LGBT people to the existing list of underrepresented cultural and ethnic groups. Studies have shown that including the contributions of LGBT people in instructional materials is linked to greater student safety and lower rates of bullying.
Now you may agree or disagree with Mr. Leno (and I happen to agree), the point is shouldn’t this bill be debated without lies about how gays are trying to introduce sexual acts to children?
Brown commits another distortion:
Already in Massachusetts, a couple was so upset with this state-sponsored sexualizing of their first-grader that they took their battle to court, where Judge Mark Wolff of the U.S. Court of Appeals ruled that the schools have a greater responsibility to teach “diversity” than to honor the requests of the parents.
In other words, “Sorry, moms and dads. We know what is best for your children, and when we decide it’s time to introduce them to ‘diversity’ — our code word for gay activist curricula — we will do so. You, on your part, have no right to interfere, so don’t even think about it.”
You will notice again how Brown does not tell the entire story. The situation he is referring to actually sprang from two cases — in one case, parents claimed to be upset that their child was read a story in which one prince ended up marrying another prince. I wonder if Brown feels that children being read the story of Hansel and Gretel teaches them cannibalism or that the story of Cinderella teaches them child abuse?
Now the other situation is one which I covered on several occasions – the David Parker situation. Parker was arrested for trespassing at his son’s school because he would not leave the premises after a meeting with school officials.
Parker claimed that he was trying to make sure that his son would not be “taught” about homosexuality. Of course the reality of the situation, which was exposed many times, was that Parker and a MA hate group, Mass Resistance, orchestrated the entire situation to harm the local gay community.
Both of those controversies combined into one court case which was dismissed by U.S. District Court of Appeals.
Brown omitted the fact that the Supreme Court also refused to listen to the case.
But how Brown dismissed the ruling gives a clue to not only his mindset but those of the religious right:
Judge Mark Wolff of the U.S. Court of Appeals ruled that the schools have a greater responsibility to teach “diversity” than to honor the requests of the parents. In other words, “Sorry, moms and dads. We know what is best for your children.”
The thing that Brown hates to acknowledge and that other members of the religious right hates to acknowledge is that heterosexual two-parent families aren’t the only ones who are raising children.
Same-sex couples and single gay parents are also raising children.
In short, Mr. Brown makes the clarion cry of “stop sexualizing our children,” but it’s not his right to make such a cry. Those are our children too. And we are not “sexualizing” them.
We are merely telling them that the gay community exists, there is nothing wrong with us, and if these children should discover that they too are LGBTQ , there is nothing wrong with that. There is no need to be depressed or be consumed with self-hatred. We are merely telling them that they are wonderful creatures as God has made them.
And it is a message that we will continue to repeat in spite of Mr. Brown and others like him.